At the Politico, Rebecca Elliott has reported that "EMILY’s List President Stephanie Schriock will not be running for Senate in Montana," and that Schriock's decision represents "another blow to Democrats’ hopes to retain the open seat in 2014" currently held by the retiring Max Baucus.

Puh-leeze. Two minutes of research would have revealed why Schriock's candidacy, already dicey in a largely pro-life state, had a high likelihood of turning into the mother of all train wrecks.

First, let's make sure everyone knows EMILY's List's official position on abortion, especially since they can't even be honest about their mission, which in real life is all about abortion. It was summarized succinctly in 2002 by Thomas Edsall when he was at the Washington Post, and it hasn't changed one bit:

A candidate must meet three qualifications to be considered for an EMILY’s List endorsement: back abortion rights, including the right to late-term (or “partial birth”) abortions; be a Democrat; and, in primary elections, be a woman.

In other words, EMILY's List supports expanding abortion rights to barely short of where Kermit Gosnell operated.

Beyond that formidable hurdle, there's this from the Associated Press on July 1 which the Politico's Elliott could have and should have found:

ABORTION: A new (Montana) law requiring girls younger than 18 to obtain parental consent before getting access to abortions goes into place. Opponents have already filed a lawsuit aimed at blocking it. Gov. Steve Bullock allowed the measure to become law without his signature as part of a strategic gamble that anticipates the legal challenge will succeed. The move would prevent a similar ballot measure from going to the voters in 2014. Bullock and women's health advocates argue the measure violates the privacy and protection rights of young women. But supporters argue parental consent is consistent with the will of voters, who just last year approved a less stringent requirement for parental notification for those under 16 years of age.

Additionally, as found on (ahem, Rebecca) Politico's own web site, Montana voters already approved that parental notification law in 2012 by a margin of 70.5% to 29.5%.

So let's see. A state whose voters are demonstrably 70% prolife also has a fair chance of having another prolife measure on the ballot in 2014. If it doesn't get on the ballot, prolife Montanans will be hopping made that a tiny minority thwarted the clearly expressed will of the people. Rebecca Elliott completely ignored the likelihood that a proabort Democrat would lose badly in such a circumstance, instead pretending, by claiming that her withdrawal is "another blow to Democrats’ hopes," that Schriock would have been a grrrreat candidate. As noted earlier, puh-leeze.

If reports like Elliott's are going to be typical, Politico should just hand its website over to the DNC and stop bothering with "reporters."